Legislature(1993 - 1994)
01/29/1993 01:50 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT SENATE AND HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
January 29, 1993
1:50 p.m.
SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Dave Donley
Senator Suzanne Little
SENATE MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman
Senator George Jacko
HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Brian Porter, Chairman
Representative Jeannette James, Vice-Chairman
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Joe Green
Representative Cliff Davidson
Representative Jim Nordlund
Representative John Davies
SENTENCING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
James V. Gould, Chairman
Phillip R. Volland, Vice-Chairman
Dean Guaneli
Representative Fran Ulmer
Duane S. Udland
Bill Cotten, Executive Director
JoAnn Holmes
Gigi Pilcher
Honorable Beverly Cutler
Honorable Warren W. Matthews
Commissioner Lloyd Rupp
Attorney General Charles Cole
Jayne E. Andreen
John Salemi
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW: ALASKA STATE SENTENCING COMMISSION
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-3, SIDE A
Number 001
Chairman Robin Taylor called the Joint Senate and House
Judiciary Committee meeting to order at 1:50 p.m. and
invited JAMES GOULD to convene the Alaska Sentencing
Commission overview.
SENATOR TAYLOR thanked REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER, Chairman
of the House Judiciary Committee, for hosting the meeting.
MR. GOULD reviewed the history of the sentencing commission
discussing, including changes in the sentencing structure,
whether to build more prisons, and whether to accept the
present sentencing structure. He announced that DEAN
GUANELI, Assistant Attorney General, was going to summarize
the basic thrust of the report as presented to the
legislature.
Number 032
MR. GUANELI reviewed information gathered by the commission
members from other sentencing systems in the United States
and concluded the presumptive sentencing structure in Alaska
was a sound system. He discussed the minor modifications
recommended to the legislature, which included alternatives
to expensive jail sentences.
MR. GUANELI outlined alternatives such as imposition of
fines commensurate with income, work service, or residing in
a half-way house setting, being under intensive supervision.
He explained why the commission has recommended the
legislature change the term "mandatory parole" in the
statutes to "mandatory release."
MR. GUANELI discussed the commission's recommendation to
extend eligibility for discretionary parole to all Class A
presumptively sentenced first offenders, except for those
convicted of manslaughter and sex offenses. He also relayed
the recommendation that the legislature should expand
immunity to probation officers in the kind of discretionary
decisions they made in supervising people on probation and
parole - to lesson the fear of liability.
MR. GUANELI concluded with a recommendation the legislature
amend the DWI law and consider something other than a
mandatory three-day stay in jail, but would be an effective
deterrent. He said that "swift and certain" punishment was
important, and he spoke about the many people in Anchorage
waiting to serve their sentences for DWI offenses.
Number 254
MR. GOULD explained most of the commission's recommendations
would not require legislative changes but rather directives
to the departments to operate differently.
MR. GOULD said the topic of alternative punishments would be
discussed by REPRESENTATIVE FRAN ULMER and DUANE UDLAND,
who was representing law enforcement.
Number 268
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER began by explaining to the new members
of the legislature why the sentencing commission was created
nearly three years ago. She outlined problems of
overcrowded prisons, expending about $110 million per year
to run the Department of Corrections, and the need to build
more prisons unless something different was done.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER explained it costs about $100 per day
to keep a person in prison, and if the legislature doesn't
want to build more prisons, more choices are needed. She
summarized the investigation of what was being done in other
states and listed some of the alternative punishments:
community residential centers where prisoners could earn
money to pay their costs and restitution; intensive
supervised probation in combination with electronic
monitoring; day reporting centers, work release programs,
and specialized alcohol and other treatment programs;
increased fines, day fines, slide scale fines, more
community work service; or using any of these choices in
combination.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER explained the cost of the suggestions
in relation to the cost of a "hard" bed in a prison and made
some dire predictions about what will happen if alternatives
are not sought.
Number 370
MR. UDLAND expressed concern that alternative sentencing
might bring the accusation of being "soft on crime," but he
believes serious criminals should be locked up for as long
as possible. He also thought there was a whole range of
possible options to save money in the future using
alternative punishment. MR. UDLAND indicated his support
for presumptive sentencing, but also favored alternatives
that worked to deter criminal behavior.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked about the effect of alternate
punishment on habitual offenders and suggested the system
would be considered too soft on the repeat offender who
might find jail too comfortable.
Number 455
MR. UDLAND suggested a tour through the jails for those who
think they are too soft, but he agreed that criminals resist
rehabilitation.
Number 497
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER reviewed a Federal Justice Conference
on alternative punishments she attended where "boot camps"
were discussed. She stated that so far the boot camp
approach has not been shown to make any appreciable
difference in the criminals, except that they come out from
boot camp more physically fit than before.
MR. GOULD reviewed the problems of data collection and
introduced BILL COTTEN, the director of the Judicial Council
to discuss the possible solutions.
MR. COTTEN addressed the lack of reliable information
regarding the Criminal Justice System on which to base
policy decisions, even though there are three data
collection systems geared to the needs of the particular
agency which maintains it. He discussed the work done by
the computer analyst for the commission, ALAN MCKELVIE, who
has started taking information from the separate computer
systems to integrate into a usable data base.
MR. COTTEN expressed regret about the lack of a specific
identifier for each offense and for each person. He
suggested reasons for having information with which to make
informed decisions and to have the computers systems be able
to work together. MR. COTTEN reviewed the progress made by
MR. MCKELVIE in coordinating the data systems and appealed
to the legislature to assist in the continuation of the data
collection efforts.
Number 592
MR. GOULD noted the high percentage of native offenders in
custody, and introduced JOANN HOLMES and GIGI PILCHER,
commission members, to address the issue.
MS HOLMES reviewed the statistics on native offenders which
did not indicate a disparity of sentencing. The commission
members found that although natives make up 16% of the
population, they are 32% of the prison population, and
account for 41% of those returning to jail for revocation of
parole, the highest number of repeat offenders.
MS. HOLMES cited, as reasons, a lack of parole and probation
supervision in the Bush as well as a lack of culturally
appropriate treatment in jail, and a lack of treatment when
released from jail. She gave, as their recommendations, an
increase in alcohol treatment programs and to get state
agencies to coordinate their activities with village
councils, existing tribal courts, and concerned persons in
the villages.
Number 647
MS. PILCHER repeated recommendations from the sentencing
commission to urge state agencies to work closely with
entities already in existence, such as village councils,
village or tribal courts, the elders, the IRA, and those who
could provide information on the individual. She stressed
the need for the Village Public Safety Officers' program and
the continuation and support of the Department of Health and
Social Services' behavioral health aide programs in the
rural communities.
Number 677
MR. GOULD introduced JUDGE BEVERLY CUTLER and JUSTICE WARREN
MATTHEWS to discuss parole eligibility.
JUSTICE MATTHEWS stressed that the correctional system is at
an emergency level with crowded jails. He expressed his
belief that, with an increasing population in Alaska, the
crime statistics will increase. He said the legislature
will have to build more jails or make an adjustment in the
correction and sentencing policies.
JUSTICE MATTHEWS presented two proposals which would not be
a panacea, but of some importance. The first would be to
allow parole for certain first offenders convicted of Class
A felonies, except for manslaughter or sex offenses. He
said two conditions would have to be imposed, according to
the sentencing commission. First the offenders must have
successfully completed all court-required treatment or be
released to an appropriate program. Second, offenders
should be required to serve one-half of the presumptive term
before becoming eligible.
Number 741
JUSTICE MATTHEWS said the benefits of the proposal were
primarily financial, with the staff calculating it would
save approximately "26 hard beds" per year, a conservative
assumption. He explained the cost of a hard bed is $30
thousand a year and including other costs there would be a
savings of $33 thousand on each bed.
JUSTICE MATTHEWS discussed risk levels and statistics for
the parole record which he characterized quite good. He
explained the parole board has quite conservative standards
about which offenders to release or parole.
Number 782
JUSTICE MATTHEWS then discussed the second proposal, a
statutory change to allow special medical parole for
terminally ill offenders, who can cost the Department of
Corrections an extraordinary amount of money. He explained
why the parole board should be allowed to grant parole to
terminally ill offenders who do not present a danger to the
community.
Number 801
JUDGE CUTLER expanded on the role of parole in the
sentencing structure, which should be the reformation of the
offender and the protection of the public. She explained
the case law of the last 25 years had set out four goals to
be considered by the sentencing judge: deterrence by the
offender, isolation of the offender, rehabilitation, and
reaffirmation of social norms. The latter was to reward
people for following the law.
JUDGE CUTLER addressed the balancing criteria used by the
parole board. She explained why presumptive sentencing and
parole eligibility were two different things, and she
referred to testimony by MR. GUANELI to expand immunity for
actions taken by certain state employees. This would
include the release and supervision of offenders on parole,
probation, furlough, work release, or similar conditional
release. JUDGE CUTLER discussed the proposed changes in
immunity law in terms of personnel and departmental
liability.
TAPE 93-3, SIDE B
Number 001
MR. GOULD next introduced PHILLIP VOLLAND, Vice-Chairman of
the commission, to make his presentation to the committee on
the state budget and declining revenues.
MR. VOLLAND reviewed his background and discussed the
urgency of the issues, using some comparative examples on
how costly it was to isolate offenders from the public. He
reviewed statistics about the capacity of the general
housing beds for those serving their sentences, and he
explained the other types of beds, medical care,
administrative segregation, etc., are needed for a prison to
operate. MR. VOLLAND testified that half of those beds are
being used for those just serving their sentence. The
prisons are over emergency capacity. In his opinion, in
every single major institutions in the system. As of about
10 days ago, the system was about 80 inmates over the
emergency capacity. In his opinion the correctional system
is in a crisis mode.
MR. VOLLAND explained the problems caused when the prisons
are unable to move a prisoner into a disciplinary setting or
protective segregation, making the prison a dangerous
environment for both correctional officers and prisoners.
MR. VOLLAND spoke to when the general recommendations by the
sentencing commission to the legislature when dealing with
additional legislation and issues arising in the future.
The first was a plea to be aware of the impact of other
legislation on corrections, such as those which would
increase sentences or affect criminal procedure along with
the costs of implementation. The second point, according to
MR. VOLLAND, was to appreciate the need for creativity and
coordination among the various criminal justice agencies.
He addressed the problem now being faced with DWI offenders:
offenders are booking their time in jail 9 and ten months in
advance.
MR. VOLLAND said there were enough DWI offenders on a
waiting list in Anchorage to fill another Sixth Avenue Jail.
He reviewed the DWI problems, stressing the part alcohol
plays in crime and violence in Alaska.
Number 195
MR. VOLLAND reviewed the material presented earlier to the
Finance Committee and described a "collision course" between
public safety and money. He said that even the
implementation of the sentencing commission recommendations
would not impact the system for some time, and he gave the
example of JUSTICE MATTHEWS' recommendations on parole for
some presumptively-sentenced offenders. The effect would be
not felt for 4 years for an 8-year presumptive sentence
(unless the changes were to be applied retroactively).
MR. VOLLAND said if the economic picture gets more bleak,
there would be some very tough choices to be made by the
legislature, such as making all presumptively sentenced
felons eligible for discretionary parole, re-examining
sentence lengths, and redefining some of the conduct now
considered criminal. He opined there would be difficult
choices to make from what was presently known.
Number 248
MR. VOLLAND articulated some of the frustrations of the
sentencing committee on the time available for working on
legislation for adoption. He expressed their hope for the
adoption of legislation to address the problems as
described. MR. VOLLAND assured cooperation from the
commission members for any legislation.
Number 285
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MR. GOULD if there were any more
presentations, and he said COMMISSIONER LLOYD RUPP from the
Department of Corrections, and ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE had
been asked to comment on the commission report.
COMMISSIONER RUPP began by complimenting MR. VOLLAND on his
presentation and expressing support for the sentencing
commission report. He reviewed the studies written about
the current problems and mentioned Operation Hope.
COMMISSIONER RUPP explained his department was one of five
agencies working within the Governor's cabinet to try to put
together a joint project approach, and to share the costs.
Number 325
COMMISSIONER RUPP emphasized the need for immunity for his
parole and probation officers, since he sensed a frustration
with the handling of "technical violations" where a person
on parole violates the parole. There has to be a decision
whether or not to place that person back into a very
expensive "hard bed," and he referred to previous testimony
from REPRESENTATIVE ULMER on the use of a community
residential center approach. COMMISSIONER RUPP expressed
concern about the need to protect his staff when they made
these difficult decisions, and he suggested a system of
fairness and equity for all.
COMMISSIONER RUPP reviewed the Department of Correction's
final master plan (funded by the legislature) which projects
a need for an additional five to 700 prison beds by 1996,
and he didn't think it was unrealistic. He urged the
legislators to listen carefully to the sentencing commission
because the number of offenders was going to continue to
rise.
Number 431
ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE expressed his personal view on cost,
which he doesn't think should be the principal factor
driving the administration of justice and the people "caught
in the web." He urged the judiciary committees to draft
legislation in furtherance of the recommendations by the
sentencing committee and let it advance through the
legislative process.
MR. GOULD said COMMISSIONER RICHARD BURTON of the Department
of Public Safety had been in attendance earlier and was
supportive of the commission report.
Number 473
SENATOR TAYLOR said he had discussed with REPRESENTATIVE
PORTER a decision to work together with committee staff to
consider the commission recommendations with both House and
Senate, with the assistance of ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE.
SENATOR TAYLOR promised legislation which would follow the
best presumption for success. He said the committee would
be working with GAYLE HORETSKI from REPRESENTATIVE PORTER'S
office and KENNY LEAF from his.
SENATOR TAYLOR opened the meeting to questions.
Number 498
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER questioned both ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE
and MR. VOLLAND about presumptive sentencing, and ATTORNEY
GENERAL COLE quoted JUSTICE MATTHEWS, who explained his
remarks.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked both judges about the need for
the courts to recognize the programs already available, the
needs that were driving the commission recommendations, and
whether there was a better way to emphasize the information.
Number 523
JUSTICE MATTHEWS said the sentence of choice for a judge was
still imprisonment, but he thought there should be some
creative thinking used, and he used fish and game cases as
an example. He informed the committee of a program at the
next Judicial Education Conference in June, where a large
segment of the day would be devoted to educating judges
about intermediate and alternative sentencing.
ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE said it had been suggested there
should be a meeting with district attorneys on the subject
of alternate sanctions, and he described fish and game
violations in terms of economic gain.
Number 557
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER noted a request in the judicial
council's budget for a bench book for judges to give them a
list of choices in sentencing.
SENATOR TAYLOR expressed pleasure at the alternative
sentence recommendations presented by the commission and
appreciation for ATTORNEY GENERAL COLE'S comment that cost
was not the essential element, but the victim and the
offender were the most important. He decried the amount of
money spent on paper work to send a person to jail, or to
the treatment centers.
After becoming aware of these frustrations during his time
on the bench, SENATOR TAYLOR was gratified to find people
willing to take the extra step. He expressed concern that
the recidivism figures were no different now than when he
was a judge, and he reviewed the statistics in Appendix E of
the sentencing report. He condemned alcohol for most of the
problems, and expressed surprise that the procedure of
implanting antabuse was not listed as a solution.
Number 616
JUDGE CUTLER said a lot of time had been spent considering
the causes and treatment of alcohol problems in the
offenders. She said they did conclude there needed to be
more alcohol treatment centers, since there was currently a
long wait to get into such a center. JUDGE CUTLER said
specific treatment recommendations were best left to those
with expertise in that area, however.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN appreciated the amount of information
the commission was offering, and asked about statistics that
would indicate the types of crimes by gender, age, or other
factors. His reasons had to do with the recidivism rate and
educational programs. He wondered why agencies weren't
treating the cause instead of symptoms.
His questions were answered by MR. COTTEN who said there was
some data by age, race, and gender, but not good information
about who recidivated.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether Alaska was considered a
young state, and whether it made a difference in the
statistics. MR. COTTEN said he was correct, but the prison
population was older than was commonly thought, principally
because of the large number of sex offenders. He predicted
the prison population would gradually become younger.
Number 681
REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND thanked the commission for an
excellent report, but wondered if some of the
recommendations gave the perception the legislature was soft
on crime. He questioned how to deal with the perception
problem.
MR. VOLLAND explained the commission had conducted local
"focus groups" to ask citizens about the issues, and he
discussed the questions and answers and finding from the
focus groups.
Number 721
REPRESENTATIVE CLIFF DAVIDSON, on the issue of presumptive
sentencing, asked about the incarceration rate in rural
Alaska. He also asked about the fiscal notes that had been
considered when presumptive sentencing was passed by the
legislature and the relationship to the present situation.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON suggested the use of education as a
way to work on the problems of alcohol consumption.
JUDGE CUTLER said a study conducted in the mid 70's found a
disproportionate number of natives represented in the prison
population, and she said those studies led to several
conferences including the 1978 Judicial Conference, with its
education of judges about discrimination in sentencing. She
said there was apparently less disparity under presumptive
sentencing.
Number 767
JUDGE CUTLER also spoke to the fiscal note question raised
by REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON, saying at that time (late 70's)
people thought there would be enough money for everything.
She addressed the structure of sentencing and the early
education about alcohol. As a parent, JUDGE CUTLER was
impressed with the alcohol education in her local schools,
but she projected any noticeable changes for a future time.
She was in favor of early intervention in all problems, but
was mindful of the parental rights and gave the example of
the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Number 797
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON thought rural residents were at an
unfair disadvantage when they were taken through the
judicial system. He claimed they were then exposed to "real
bad characters," so the bad got worse before going back into
the community.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he shared REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON'S
frustrations.
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES was impressed with the extent
of the work done by the sentencing commission and their
report. She urged the necessity for prevention and asked
for statistics on the present population in the prisons in
relation to retroactive discretionary parole.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES wanted to know how many beds would be
saved.
Number 829
JUSTICE MATTHEWS reviewed the assumptions and said 26 beds
would be freed up right away, while other assumptions would
provide about fifty more.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER explained approximately 900 DWI
offenders were waiting 9 months to serve their time in
Anchorage, and freeing up to 25 to 50 beds would make a
tremendous difference in the backlog. She discussed the
learning effect for the members of the sentencing commission
in making hard choices. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER wanted the
casual drinker to think about the risk factor and take a cab
home.
TAPE 93-4, SIDE A
Number 001
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER suggested the public should be made
aware of the trade off's in the acceptance of discretionary
parole for some offenders.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES asked how the commission's
recommendations could be used to reduce the recidivism rate
and to rehabilitate the prison population. He suggested
working toward a constitutional mandate for rehabilitation.
MR. VOLLAND wished there was better data on the recidivism
rate, but concluded there was very little information. He
quoted the commission as feeling the recommendations they
made would have an impact on recidivism. MR. VOLLAND
discussed ways the recommendations would be able to change
the immediacy and the effectiveness of sentencing. He
thought there should be continued study and monitoring of
rehabilitative programs, but felt hampered by the lack of
data.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES also felt it was important to have the
data to evaluate the programs.
Number 135
SENATOR TAYLOR said he had been requesting recidivism data,
and he praised REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES' questions.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER remarked the discussions always came
down to alcohol, and he asked about the effects of the
decriminalization of the former crime of being "drunk in
public" as related to more serious crimes. He was told the
commission had not specifically discussed that issue.
SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed a study done in Barrow about the
effects of using an alcohol dry-out center, which was found
to be successful until the "wrong" person was dried out and
the center was closed. He continued to describe the
problems with alcohol abuse in Barrow and again suggested
the use of antabuse. SENATOR TAYLOR expressed great concern
at the numbers of deaths related to alcohol.
Number 205
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER returned to the subject of being drunk
in public as considered to be a medical problem, and the use
of "drunk in public" offense as a crime prevention measure.
He said the number of victims were reduced, and he credited
early intervention. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER thought there
should be a coordinated system to reinstate the drunk in
public charge.
Number 247
SENATOR TAYLOR spoke to the void in intervention in juvenile
alcohol problems and proposed something be done in the
juvenile justice system to react to the juvenile alcohol-
related accidents.
JUSTICE MATTHEWS expressed concern about COMMISSIONER RUPP'S
expressed need for an additional 700 prison beds and early
parole for serious offenders. There was a discussion with
MR. VOLLAND over the use of hard beds.
Number 323
COMMISSIONER RUPP explained the difficult decisions between
the felony population inside the wall and the misdemeanor
population outside the wall, but he stressed the consistent
factor was alcohol. He claimed that until the alcohol
problem was solved, the rate of crimes would continue to
increase.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON questioned COMMISSIONER RUPP about
privatizing Project Hope, and the commissioner said there
were some aspects that dealt with non-profit corporations
providing services, which would be paid by the offenders
from their permanent fund dividend check.
SENATOR TAYLOR expressed his appreciation to the sentencing
commission for all their work and for briefing the joint
committees.
JIM GOULD noted that GAYLE HORETSKI, a former member of the
sentencing commission, was now a member of REPRESENTATIVE
PORTER'S staff.
There being no further business to come before the
committee, the meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|